All posts in category Movie Review

The Tribeca Film Festival 2013

Through my work for JustPressPlay, I’ve been covering this year’s Tribeca Film Festival with extreme dedication. I’ve seen 20-odd films so far and intend on seeing plenty more the rest of the week. But with the Festival in full swing, I thought I would catalog my reviews so far to keep you up-to-date on the best (and worst) offerings this year. So delve into my coverage of this year’s films and, if you can, go check some of them out! (And I’ll keep updating this article as more of my reviews get posted.)

The English Teacher

large_english_teacher_1Linda Sinclair (Julianne Moore) is perfectly comfortable with her quiet life as a high school English teacher—living alone and filling her spare time with reading novels and screaming at telemarketers on the phone. (Or so the trite and too on-the-nose narrator would have us believe.) But, when former student Jason Sherwood (Michael Angarano) returns to town after failing to make it as a Broadway playwright, Linda starts to become more active in her own life. She reads Jason’s play The Chrysalis and loves it (weird moth characters and all). She loves it so much that she becomes determined to mount a high school production of it (despite its decidedly adult and Ibsen-like tone). Yet Linda gets carried away with her passion for the project and her need to rekindle Jason’s aims as a writer. (read more)

The Pretty One

pretty_one_bannerOnce upon a time not too long ago, in a land not unlike rural California, there were twin sisters (both played by Zoe Kazan) who were as different as night and day. Audrey was a social butterfly. She won every competition. She stole boys’ hearts. She had a chic sense of style. And she moved away from home not long after her mother’s death. Conversely, Laurel was a wallflower. She had only one winning ribbon to her name. She only got the boys who weren’t good enough to attract Audrey. She had a hipster sense of style. And she stayed home to take care of her father after her mother’s death. (read more)

A Birder’s Guide to Everything

birders_guide_bannerDavid Portnoy (Kodi Smit-McPhee) may have spotted the extinct Labrador Duck. Sure, David’s only a 15-year-old birder and still reeling from his mother’s death over a year ago, but he needs to place his faith in something, so why not this extinct bird (although he will deny later in the film that the bird is a metaphor for anything). It also doesn’t help that his father (James LeGros) is about to marry Juliana (Daniela Lavender), who was David’s mother’s nurse no less. Thus it is understandable that David wants to evade the wedding to track down the supposedly extinct duck. (read more)

What Richard Did

whatricharddidRichard spent the weekend hanging out with his friends. Richard started dating Lara. Richard had a family cookout with his rugby coach. Richard grew jealous of Conor’s intimate friendship with Lara. Richard went shopping. And Richard slept with Lara at his family’s beach house. That’s what Richard did. Oh, and Richard killed someone. (read more)

A Single Shot

large_a_single_shot_1While out hunting a deer, notorious poacher John Moon (a heavily-bearded Sam Rockwell) accidentally shoots and kills a young woman. As he searches for a place to dump the body, he stumbles upon her encampment and a box full of cash. Haunted by the dead woman’s image, John attempts to redeem himself by using the money to salvage what’s left of his tenuous marriage to Jess (Kelly Reilly), with whom he shares a son. But as the men who want that money begin to terrorize him, John is caught in a deadly (and dull) game of cat and mouse. (read more)

Elaine Stritch: Shoot Me

elaine_stritch_shoot_me_bannerElaine Stritch is an iconic actress of both the stage and screen. Now well into her mid-80s she is still pushing herself to produce quality performances. But between her battle with alcoholism and combating a serious case of diabetes, Stritch is starting to grow weary. Not that she’ll let that stop her from helming yet another one-woman cabaret show (with a multi-city tour to boot). So one week after spotting Stritch at her hair salon, filmmaker Chiemi Karasawa agreed with her hair stylist’s suggestion that she should make a documentary about Stritch. (read more)

Trust Me

trust_me_bannerThe newest movie by filmmaker Clark Gregg (aka The Avengers‘ Agent Coulson) delves into his surprisingly “ambiguous feelings” for the movie-making business—specifically the world of child actors and their agents. Playing one of those notorious agents himself, Gregg brings to life the down-on-his-luck Howard Holloway. Struggling to retain a single client while combating his highly successful archnemesis Aldo Shocklee (Sam Rockwell in a mercifully focused and comedic performance—unlike in A Case of You), Howard fears his days in the business are numbered. (read more)

The Reluctant Fundamentalist

reluctant_fundam_bannerWhile it may seem odd that acclaimed Indian filmmaker Mira Nair is tackling a film centered around a Pakistani man, she certainly doesn’t think so. What drew her to The Reluctant Fundamentalist was its new look at the Iraq and Afghantistan wars. She read the novel (of the same name) by author Mohsin Hamid and fell in love with the fresh new look at the psychology of this subject. While those stories are normally told from the American point of view,Fundamentalist looks at it through the eyes of a Pakistani man. The film delves into “the mutual suspicion with which America and Pakistan (or the Muslim world) look at one another.” And through this unique point of view, we can gain a deeper understanding of the cultural differences that have informed so much hate in our country. (read more)

Bluebird

bluebird-john-slattery-skipLance Edmands’ debut film Bluebird is inspired by the Robert Frost poem, “The Last Word of the Blue Bird.” As he summates, “the poem tells the story of a little girl named Lesley who finds a bluebird, which she befriends. But when winter comes, the bird tells her that it must fly south.” The bird must escape the inhospitable environment of the wintry north if it hopes to survive. Edmands says, “The poem was used to teach children about loss.” It is exactly this loss and striving to find an environment to live in that he captures in his film. (read more)

G.B.F.

large_gbf_2In suburban high schools, the G.B.F. (or Gay Best Friend, for those not up on the vernacular) is the hot new thing. The only problem for the students in G.B.F.? There are no gay students at the school—at least not openly gay. But Brent Van Camp (Paul Iacono) plans to change all that by coming out and using the most popular girls in school to launch him to the top as Prom King. What ensues is a pop culture-infused meta comedy with Game of Thrones manipulation. (read more)

Floating Skyscrapers

large_Floating_Skyscrapers_1_pubsFor fifteen years, Kuba (Mateusz Banasiuk) has been training to be a champion swimmer. When not at the gym or in the pool, he spends his time sexing his girlfriend Sylwia (Marta Nieradkiewicz) and dealing with his overbearing mother Ewa (Katarzyna Herman), who bares a disturbing resemblance to Norma Bates (for instance, she makes Kuba massage her shoulders while she’s in the bath—with him still nursing a Sylwia-inspired erection, no less). Out of a seeming boredom with the status quo, Kuba begins to be distracted by guys at the gym—even going to so far as to hook up with a guy who cruises him in the shower (although he freaks out about it leaves before he can finish). (read more)

Adult World

large_adult_world_2The protagonist of Adult World may be a familiar figure. She just graduated from college. She relies on her parents for money. She thinks she’s the greatest writer of her generation. No, this isn’t Hannah Horvath; this is Amy Anderson. But don’t worry, Adult World isn’t trying to be like Girls, it’s trying to be funny—and it’s highly successful at it, too. (read more)

Deep Powder

large_DEEP_POWDER_2It’s the early 1980’s; and the Deep Powder Alpine Country Club is a secret society at the savvy and prestigious New England boarding school, Mount Ambrose. The teenage members of this club—easily resembling Gossip Girl characters—enjoy skiing (both kinds); and, once a year, one lucky member makes a drug run to Ecuador for some high-grade cocaine. Based on true events, Deep Powder follows the dramatic final year of this club and the resulting investigation into their illicit actions. (read more)

Hide Your Smiling Faces

images2013 is shaping up to be the year of Kids with Guns (cue that Gorillaz song). From Mia Wasikowska toting a rifle in Stoker to those Disney darlings forcing James Franco to fellate a pistol in Spring Breakers, youth gun violence is percolating throughout pop culture. But Hide Your Smiling Faces isn’t a hedonistic look at violence; it’s a quiet contemplation of death through the eyes of children (with guns). (read more)

A Case of You

large_a_case_of_you_1A Case of You is a romantic comedy for the 21st century. When Sam (Justin Long) tries to woo the aloof girl at the coffee shop, Birdie (Evan Rachel Wood), he stalks her Facebook profile to transform himself into the man of her dreams. Such is the exact setup you would expect from a rom com, and A Case of You does not fail to meet the rote expectations of its genre. (read more)

Leave a Comment
by xoxojk on April 24, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in Movie Review
Tagged , , , ,

Posted by xoxojk on April 24, 2013

http://thejkreview.wordpress.com/2013/04/24/the-tribeca-film-festival-2013/

Book vs. Film: “The Paperboy” Film Far Outshines the Novel

Pete Dexter’s novel The Paperboy is a concisely written account of a journalist’s attempts to free a supposedly innocent man on death row. How then, does Lee Daniels’ adaptation of the book (which he co-wrote with Dexter) become a lust-fueled orgy of exploitation? Could the answer simply be that because Daniels is a gay African American male, he chose to use those identities to inform his auteur take on the novel? Or did Daniels just simply want to make a wildly bizarre film after his heartwrenching film Precious? And which (if either) is the one you should check out?

the-paperboyIn the late 60s, Hillary van Wetter (John Cusack) is on Death Row for the murder of a sheriff (who is beloved for only killing black men). Van Wetter is about to receive some aid from an unlikely gang composed of the famed Miami Times reporting duo Ward Jansen (Matthew McConaughey) and Yardley Archeman (David Oyelowo); Ward’s brother—and temporary driver—Jack (Zac Efron); and the woman, Charlotte Bless (Nicole Kidman), who is in love with van Wetter despite only knowing him from the letters she’s written to him in prison. Determined to prove his innocence (in the murder, at least), the gang ostracizes themselves in the small community as they aim to release this violent man from prison.

Both book and film begin from this scenario, but slowly their stories diverge. In Dexter’s novel, Jack narrates from the first-person his account of what happens in the journalists’ quest for truth. He protects and idolizes Ward (who gets into some trouble with some sailors); clashes with Yardley; and watches a self-proclaimed maneater devour his father and his father’s newspaper (which Jack is supposed to inherit). Dexter tells a succinct story that concerns itself more with finding the truth than with oversexing the characters. While this makes for a perfectly adequate novel, it does very little to set it apart from other adequate or mediocre novels.

Daniels’ film, however, alters much of what happens in the book (or at least how it’s portrayed), making for a far more engaging (if also absurd) story. The Jansen’s maid, Anita (Macy Gray), narrates the film with her exaggerated Southern accent. Yardley has an affected British accent and is portrayed by an African Englishman, despite the character in the novel being a white American man. Even Jack and Charlotte’s relationship (which is merely a hinted at flirtation in the novel) turns into a full-blown sexual affair (with Charlotte peeing on Jack after a jellyfish attack to prove her affection for him—a group of sunbathing nurses does the task in the novel).

9780679421757The greatest (and my personal favorite) change is Daniels’ overall approach to the film: making it essentially a love note to Zac Efron. Gratuitous shots of him swimming or running around in his white briefs make it easy to see what Charlotte found so attractive about Jack. And Efron’s ease with this role shows that he’s really coming into his own as an actor. All of this adds the necessary character development to Jack that is lost from him not narrating the piece.

While I’m the first person to say that you should always read the book first (and I do stand by that), The Paperboy is that very rare exception. If you are interested in reading Dexter’s concise novel then it is best to read that before you tackle the film. But the film is such an amazing roller coaster of an adventure that I highly recommend you see it and don’t even bother with the book, which pales in comparison.

 

1 Comment
by xoxojk on April 2, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in Book Review, Movie Review
Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted by xoxojk on April 2, 2013

http://thejkreview.wordpress.com/2013/04/02/book-vs-film-the-paperboy-film-far-outshines-the-novel/

Spring Break Forever, Bitches: A Review

spring-breakers-poster-1It’s spring break, y’all! From the writer of that messed-up movie about Kids with AIDS, Harmony Korine wrote and directed this film about one of college’s most important rites of passage. Spring Breakers follows a group of four girls who just wanna have fun but end up getting into deep trouble (not just with the law, either). What starts as their ideal partying vacay quickly turns into their biggest nightmare (at least for some of them).

Naughty party girls Brit (Prettly Little Liars’ Ashley Benson), Candy (High School Musical’s Vanessa Hudgens), and Cotty (Rachel Korine, wife of Harmony) are so desperate to get to spring break that they throw on ski masks and rob a fast food joint using a mallet and a realistic-looking squirt gun. With money in hand, they convince goody-goody Faith (Wizard of Waverly Place’s Selena Gomez), who wants to get out of their small college town and “see” things, to join them on their debaucherous spring break.

It’s all fun and games on spring break, until the girls get arrested for using drugs at a party. When drug and arms dealer Alien (James Franco—covered in tattoos and wearing a grille) bails them out, they are forced to follow him around like his own playmate entourage. But the dark and seedy underworld of spring break proves to be too much for some of the girls, yet getting out of Alien’s clutches is not very easy.

spring-breakers-posterKorine purposefully cast these young, tween stars to provide a greater contrast between innocence and violence. Just as Stoker involves youth violence, so does this film; but even with the spring break backdrop, the film is still not glorifying violence (although they seem to live in a consequence-free world). The violence in the film seems far more frightening than encouraging, showing just how desensitized our youth culture has become.

The biggest problem with the film lies in Korine’s filmmaking style. The repetitious montages and dialogue make some of the sequences feel exceedingly tedious. Shots of partying or lawlessness are constantly recycled throughout the film. And certain lines are play on a loop (oftentimes you hear conversations before they occur within the stories timeline). Oftentimes it feels like the film is just treading water, frustrating the viewer; but the payoffs at the end make up for most of it. Some of that repetitious dialogue becomes comedic, but it’s hard to tell if it’s intentionally funny or not.

Spring Breakers is a damning portrait of youth in America. At times it feels like a frivolous film of excess, but other times an important message piece. Either way you look at it, the stunning performances by Benson and Gomez and the jarring incorporation of Britney Spears songs used throughout the film make this one vacation you won’t want to miss.

Related articles
Leave a Comment
by xoxojk on March 22, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in Movie Review
Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Posted by xoxojk on March 22, 2013

http://thejkreview.wordpress.com/2013/03/22/spring-break-forever-bitches-a-review/

“Dark Skies” Proves to Be a Compelling Horror Film

Let me preface this by saying that I don’t care for horror films. They are almost always overwrought cliches (or just overwrought torture porn). Sometimes they can have a great cast that makes it fun—not scary—to watch. Yet sometimes they can have truly terrifying moments. Dark Skies falls into that latter category (at least for me and the 8 other people in my theater).

imagesThe Barrett family is going through some financial tribulations. Patriarch Daniel (Josh Hamilton—who looks distractingly like a big-boned Justin Bartha) is an unemployed architect—who isn’t these days?—that must rely on his wife Lacy’s (Keri Russell) meager realtor income to pay the bills. While this may be a problem that would resolve itself quickly, a series of bizarre occurrences begin to take their monetary toll. Someone (or something) has been invading the house and eating all the lettuce and rearranging the canned goods into mathematical art. It’s not until Lacy sees a mysterious figure in her young son Sammy’s (Kadan Rockett) room and three flocks of birds dive straight into her house that she begins to really worry.

She self-diagnoses her problems on the internet and realizes that she and her family are being invaded by a form of extraterrestrial life referred to as The Grays (could they be the same breed of alien as the ones in American Horror Story: Asylum). They seem to be after Sammy, presumably because Lacy’s older son Jesse (Dakota Goyo) is merely a rebellious pothead. After consulting retired alien hunter Edwin Pollard (J.K. Simmons) he confirms their worst fears—but won’t interfere on their behalf. He merely bestows some sage advice and sends them on their way.

The story certainly sounds basic and banal enough, but writer/director Scott Stewart portrays the story with a heightened sense of realism that makes the film compelling. So many horror stories seem to devolve into a series of completely unbelievable events that you can’t help but roll your eyes at. In Dark Skies, however, the events unfold just as they would in real life. When Lacy has a seemingly mental breakdown, she gets laid off from work, increasing their financial stakes. Of course, the alien intrusions are “unrealistic” but this is a horror film.

While the realism of the film makes it bearable, the glimpses of The Grays are what truly frighten you. First it’s just flashes of their creepily skinny forms. Then they’re lurking around corners and sneaking up behind the terrified Barretts. I never jump in fright during a film, but Dark Skies nearly elicited a few whelps amid all my cringing in horror. (The shadows in the vastly empty theater heightened my terrors as well.) The not-so-happy ending of the film, too, left me feeling haunted as I walked the dark streets alone afterwards.

As one of the only horror films to ever terrify me, I believe there must be something great about this film. It may just be that Russell’s acting is so compelling that I couldn’t help but get drawn into the story. Yet Stewart’s handling of the material was so deft that most of the credit must be placed on his shoulders. If you want to see a movie that will really terrify you, then this one will hit the spot (and you won’t have much trouble finding a moody, empty theater for true horror ambience).

 

1 Comment
by xoxojk on March 15, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in Movie Review
Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Posted by xoxojk on March 15, 2013

http://thejkreview.wordpress.com/2013/03/15/dark-skies-proves-to-be-a-compelling-horror-film/

The New “Oz” Reveals Himself to Be Both Great and Terrible

Once again we return to the yellow brick road, this time exploring the untold story of the Wizard of Oz. In 1905 we find Oscar Diggs (James Franco) working the carnival circuit before getting sucked into a cyclone while making a harried escape in a balloon. Before that, we get to see how sleazy he is, giving his “grandmother’s” music box to any girl who’ll listen to it. That’s the signature move he pulls on sweet, naive Theodora (Mila Kunis) upon his crash landing in Oz.

220px-Oz_-_The_Great_and_Powerful_PosterDirector Sam Raimi does the requisite jump from black & white to vivid color (and a switch to expansive widescreen) to transition Oscar’s arrival; but the switch isn’t as magical as when Dorothy emerges from her crashed house in Munchkinland. Raimi welcomes the humbug wizard into Oz with a cacophony of color and bells akin to Alice’s adventures with the flowers in Wonderland. Due to copyright infringement issues, nothing of this film is allowed to resemble the classic 1939 film, making all the landscapes and sets feel generic rather than fresh, new expressions of that marvelous land.

Theodora proudly proclaims Oscar as the prophesied wizard and leads him to the Emerald City in the hopes that he’ll make her his queen (in Raimi’s Oz, women aren’t allowed to hold the throne—unlike Baum’s Oz which is ruled by the benevolent Queen Ozma). At the capital we meet Theodora’s older sister Evanora (Rachel Weisz) who is less trustful of the newly arrived wizard. She shows him the treasure vault that belongs to the king (which he literally jumps into a la Scrooge McDuck), telling him that if he kills the Wicked Witch he’ll be crowned king.

On his quest he brings along his new, faithful servant monkey Finley (Zach Braff) and a newly repaired China Girl (Joey King). If you are keeping up with your Oz geography, you’ll realize that Oscar’s close proximity to China Country puts him in the middle of Quadling Country, meaning that the Wicked Witch who resides here is none other than the bubble-loving Glinda (Michelle Williams). (What a plot twist!) The tables turn and Glinda must assist (read: manipulate) Oscar into becoming a genuine hero to save the Emerald City from those nasty sisters.

From there, writers David Lindsay-Abaire and Mitchell Kapner try to subvert expectations while setting up the premise for the well-known Wizard of Oz film. When one of the sisters bites into a green apple (a la Snow White—can you tell this movie was produced by Disney?) her heart turns to stone and her skin turns green. The bad witches battle the good folks of Oz in a predictable fight (we know that none of the main characters can die because they are all important players when Dorothy arrives).

If the film fails to capture the magic of The Wizard of Oz, it equally fails to provide any insight into these characters and their backstories (unlike Wicked). And without magic, insight, or storytelling nuances, the film feels flatter than a hammerhead’s noggin. While Raimi may hold true to Oz geography, the writers fail to be faithful to the “works of L. Frank Baum” on which this story is supposedly based. The title itself is an egregious misinterpretation of the Wizard who in the original novel refers to himself as “Oz the Great and Terrible” (a much more fitting title for this film). Not to put too fine a point on it, but those slippers that the sisters obsess over (I know they can’t use ruby ones but they are silver in the novels) are not even obliquely hinted at.

The only way this dull special effects film could’ve been saved is through the acting (since it is attempting to be a “character-driven” story). Unfortunately, the amazingly talented Weisz can’t carry the film all by herself. Williams plays Glinda as a disappointingly bland and kindly witch whose attempts at manipulating Oscar don’t feel sufficient. Kunis makes Theodora feel painfully one-dimensional, a fault I only half ascribe to her because the character is written as a one-dimensional hack job. Braff’s Finley never quite hits the comedic chords needed to make the monkey charming, and that little inconsistent China Girl is forced to be both adorably charming and fiercely sassy. Lastly, Franco, on whose shoulders the film rests, is able to make Oscar’s slimy charisma immensely believable but unable to provide any likeability when the character has his more sincere moments.

As the biggest Oz fanatic you will ever know, I’m all for visiting (and revisiting) Baum’s fantasy land. And Oz is an enjoyable romp into that world. Just refrain from putting too high of expectations on this film in the way the witches put too high of expectations on the wizard himself.

 

1 Comment
by xoxojk on March 14, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in Movie Review
Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted by xoxojk on March 14, 2013

http://thejkreview.wordpress.com/2013/03/14/the-new-oz-reveals-himself-to-be-both-great-and-terrible/

Book vs. Film: “The Shining” Will Haunt You in Both Forms

39473d46f1de866e1c7a3763c23d2054The film The Shining is beloved by many, but how many of them have actually read the book? Turns out: hardly any. One fan even said he heard that films adapted from Stephen King’s novels are better than his actual books. While I can’t categorically attest to that, I can say that the film The Shining pales in comparison to the novel The Shining. It is one of King’s best novels, combining brilliant imagery with complex psychology for a truly haunting experience. It’s no small wonder that this is the only of his novels to land a spot on The List.

The story focuses around Jack Torrance who is so desperate for a job that he becomes the off-season caretaker for the secluded Overlook Hotel. He, along with his wife Wendy and 6-year-old son Danny, will spend 8 months alone in the hotel, preventing the pipes from freezing over and the boiler from overheating. Wendy is frail and fearful of her husband whose previous history of alcoholism led him to break their son’s arm (and attack a student); yet she loves him enough to follow him to the Overlook in the hopes that a secluded season of writing will rehabilitate him. It is only little Danny whose “shining” premonitions of the horrors within the Overlook give him trepidation for this venture.

129_shiningnewThe chapters shuffle through the main characters’ perspectives, giving striking point-of-view perceptions of what is occurring in the present while also imparting insight into the characters’—and hotel’s—backstories that help frame their deteriorating psychological states. While this helps provide the framework for the story, it’s the recurring imagery used throughout that elevates this novel into profound horror. Iconic images and phrases like the roque mallet, the topiary animals, Room 217, and, of course, “REDRUM” enhance the eerie mood and building tensions of the story. Thus establishing King as a renowned horror genre writer.

As iconic as the novel is, the film is equally iconic in its own regards. Stanley Kubrick’s film is considered one of the best horror films, and that’s a worthy assessment. The film sets an uneasy mood with flashes of horrific images that Danny (Danny Lloyd) can see combined with Jack’s (Jack Nicholson) descent into mania—not to mention a creepy score by Wendy Carlos and Rachel Elkind. The overall look of the film is brilliant thanks to help from Roy Walker, for production design; Les Tomkins, for art direction; and John Alcott, for cinematography. These elements combine to make a visually appealing and eerie film.

tumblr_m0hkxhPS6f1r1au5yo1_500But, as great as the film is, it seems to miss the point of the book. In King’s Shining the Overlook itself is an important, menacing character. It has motivations and manipulations that slowly become central to the story. In Kubrick’s Shining the Overlook is just an expanse of open rooms with mismatching color schemes spread throughout. It acts as the playground for Jack’s psychotic breakdown but has very little influence on his actual mental state. The film also eliminates nearly every piece of character backstory; sacrificing story for languorous shots of the empty hotel or Danny pedaling around in his little tricycle.


There are smaller things that are altered or lost in the adaptation as well. Would it have been so hard to have Jack chase Wendy around with a roque mallet? (A baseball bat makes an appearance, however.) The sound of the clock chiming still rings in my ears from reading the book, yet that inciting moment for the climactic chain of events is missing from the film. The overheating boiler and creepy topiary creatures are swapped out for intense outdoor blizzard shots and a hedge maze chase scene (presumably for budgetary reasons). Even the haunted Room 217 is changed to 237 in the film (presumably for superstitious reasons). It seems that only the slight alteration to how “REDRUM” is written (with the inverted letters) manages to add the visual punch needed for its reveal.

The-Shining-movie-poster200All such changes make for a disappointing cinematic experience (when read in close conjunction with the book). King’s novel is rife with delicious visual imagery that yearns to be depicted onscreen, yet the film fails to capture much of that. An inevitable remake of the film may be able to capture these, but without Nicholson’s ingenious and iconic performance will it be as effective? Even Shelley Duvall as Wendy, with deeply hideous costumes, perfectly captures the intense anxiety of the character. Only the depiction of Danny and his imaginary friend Tony was a major acting disappointment. When Danny first spoke as Tony through his finger, the film nearly lost all sense of believability. A new adaptation would better capture Tony as the distant figure who subconsciously speaks to Danny.

It should come as no surprise that the book is overall better than its filmic adaptation. (When, if ever, has the reverse been true?) The film is a visually stunning piece that has impacted pop culture for decades, but the novel is much more effective at telling the story while greatly engaging the reader. So this is one case where I can safely advise that you see the film first before tackling the novel—yet I certainly recommend that you do both.

Leave a Comment
by xoxojk on February 8, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die, Book Review, Movie Review
Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted by xoxojk on February 8, 2013

http://thejkreview.wordpress.com/2013/02/08/book-vs-film-the-shining-will-haunt-you-in-both-forms/

“Amour” Is a Painfully Real Octogenarian Horror Film

Speaking of boring films, Amour is one helluva piece of work. While films about death can be engaging and even eye opening, Michael Haneke’s film is arduously true to life. The film follows an octogenarian couple facing the end of their lives in their French flat. After Anne (Emmanuelle Riva) suffers a stroke, her husband Georges (Jean-Louis Trintignant) must care for her as she slowly dies. This tests his intense love for her, causing him to lose his mind as hers deteriorates.

OPCC_01_AMOUR_8.14_Layout 1Both Riva and Trintignant deliver powerful performances that make the film feel even more painstakingly real. Haneke’s writing and direction are also vividly realistic. But this film feels more like a horror film for audiences over the age of 60. Perfectly capturing this couple dying of old age, it serves almost as a warning of what’s to come in most of our lives (and most likely hitting too close to home for the aforementioned demographic). It’s enough to make you want to kill yourself at age 50.

Because this is a foreign-langue film, shots dwell languorously on the minutiae of their lives. Do we need a 5-minute shot of Georges clipping flowers to know what he is doing? Most of this film is comprised of this painful realism, increasing the inevitable horror of old age. As strokes continue to ravage Anne’s mind, can you really blame her for begging Georges to end her life?

This year’s batch of Best Pictures is bloated with excessively long films (like Lincoln, Django Unchained, Les Miserables, Zero Dark Thirty); and Amour fits right in with them. Its extensive length causes you to almost forget Riva’s compelling performance or Haneke’s brilliance in telling such a “normal” story. However, Amour is a horrific film to sit through and a horrific glimpse into old age.

2 Comments
by xoxojk on January 31, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in Movie Review
Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Posted by xoxojk on January 31, 2013

http://thejkreview.wordpress.com/2013/01/31/amour-is-a-painfully-real-octogenarian-horror-film/

“Lincoln” Is More Historical Bore Than Illuminating Biopic

Lincoln-posterReferring to Steven Spielberg’s film Lincoln as a biopic is a bit of a misnomer. The film’s action is centered around the final months of President Abraham Lincoln’s life as he fights to get the anti-slavery amendment passed.  Following the political machinations involved with the amendment, Lincoln feels more like an extended episode of The West Wing than a biopic of Lincoln’s life.

Because it’s a Spielberg film, he’s managed to accrue an all-star cast. Daniel Day-Lewis astutely plays Lincoln, vanishing into the character and easily managing the monologues screenwriter Tony Kushner wrote. Sally Field earnestly plays his wife Mary Todd, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt brings a little depth to his rebellious son Robert. Among the Washington politicos are a variety of names you will most likely recognize: David Strathairn, Hal Holbrook, John Hawkes, Lee Pace, and Tommy Lee Jones (and keep your eyes peeled for a special appearance by Girls’ Adam Driver).

When the politicking doesn’t get too obtuse, the plotting for votes can be somewhat entertaining. The film also highlights some of the family drama that Lincoln was dealing with at the time as well, which has its compelling moments. But, overall, this is a fairly dull film. Kushner’s writing is more suited for a stage adaptation of the material. Monologues—both political and personal—abound; but the cinematography leaves these speeches feeling stagnant. (And wouldn’t we rather see Day-Lewis win a Tony instead of yet another Oscar?)

Even if you can manage to get engaged in the struggle for amendment votes, the big vote occurs around the 2-hour mark of this 150-minute film. That leaves a full 30 minutes to show a ponderous Lincoln, slowly moving to his inevitable assassination (which is as equally anticlimactic as the amendment vote). Lincoln is one of the most over-hyped films of this Awards season, and the one you’re least likely to see. And you might as well keep it that way, unless you’d like to pay $14 for a nap.

Related articles

 

2 Comments
by xoxojk on January 30, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in Movie Review
Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted by xoxojk on January 30, 2013

http://thejkreview.wordpress.com/2013/01/30/lincoln-is-more-historical-bore-than-illuminating-biopic/

“Django” Is an Entertaining Revenge Story, Despite Becoming Too “Unchained” in Its Ending

Just like Inglorious Basterds, Django Unchained is a revenge period drama replete with Quentin Tarantino’s quintessential gore, violence, and foul language. Jamie Foxx plays the eponymous hero who is freed from slavery by Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz), a bounty hunter who needs Django to identify some vicious slave owners. From there, Schultz trains Django to be a ruthless bounty hunter so they can track down and free Django’s wife Broomhilda (Kerry Washington).

220px-Django_Unchained_PosterAlthough it takes place in the Deep South, Django’s style and tone resemble Western films. Schultz and Django are a team of cowboys who have excellent shooting skills with a pistol. They’re a capable duo that must infiltrate Calvin Candie’s (Leonardo DiCaprio) plantation and slyly wrangle for Broomhilda’s freedom.

Again, Waltz plays an amusing German character, keeping a lighthearted tone through most of the film and preventing it from becoming a dark revenge story. His prominence in the film makes his nomination as Best Supporting Actor feel like a slap in the face (similar to Philip Seymour Hoffman’s “supporting” role in The Master)—especially since Foxx’s role wasn’t good enough to snag a nomination. And while many have cried over DiCaprio’s seeming snub from the Supporting Actor category, it is really Samuel L. Jackson’s despicable slave Stephen who deserved some awards attention. His loyalty to Candie is grossly misguided and is the source of all the trouble in the last 90-odd minutes of the film. (Though I’m still confused as to what his character’s motivations were.)

Tarantino’s Oscar nomination for the screenplay (and Golden Globe win) is mostly deserved. He’s crafted a well-told story that combines exposition with action and never leaves you feeling bored. But fatigue sets into the viewer and the story in the final, indulgent thirty minutes when the story strays into a long sequence of gratuitous violence that does nothing to sustain or expand upon the story. While Basterds is similarly long in length, it doesn’t feel as long because the story feels incomplete until the end. However, Django could have easily been tweaked to have a satisfactory end in the first Candieland shootout.

Length problems aside, Django is another great Tarantino film that will please his fans while also providing amusement for those who find him to be a bit much. There’s surprisingly little gore in the first two hours of the film, making it an easier entry in his oeuvre to stomach. And his controversial use of the n-word in the film feels more apt than scandalous, adding believability to the characters. This film is definitely one of the more entertaining films in the Best Picture category this year.

Related articles

 

5 Comments
by xoxojk on January 28, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in Movie Review
Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted by xoxojk on January 28, 2013

http://thejkreview.wordpress.com/2013/01/28/django-is-an-entertaining-revenge-story-despite-becoming-too-unchained-in-its-ending/

This Hobbit’s “Unexpected Journey” Feels Like a Rerun

Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings trilogy was brilliant and groundbreaking, and he’s using The Hobbit to (unnecessarily) remind you of that. Returning to those iconic sets, recycling that familiar score, reusing those great actors, Jackson has transformed J.R.R. Tolkein’s little children’s prequel novel (and some “relevant” LOTR appendices stories) into a massive trilogy of as epic proportion as his original trilogy. The idea of having Jackson adapt The Hobbit was pleasing, but, like a kid in a candy store, he got far too carried away.

The_HobbitThe Hobbit occurs 60 years before the events of LOTR when Gandalf (Ian McKellen) recruits Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman) as a burglar on a grand quest with a gang of dwarves. Their aim is to take back the Lonely Mountain from the evil dragon Smaug and retrieve their lost treasure. The first half of their adventure mimics that of The Fellowship of the Ring and Jackson makes sure to add more allusions to Fellowship when they don’t naturally occur in the novel (he somehow manages to squeeze in some drama at Weathertop).

A lot of various plot threads are introduced in this film, making it feel especially bloated. When familiar characters are worked into the story—Elijah Wood pops up as Frodo in one gratuitous scene, Cate Blanchett’s Galadriel makes a seemingly unimportant cameo—it feels like cheating. Yet when new characters are introduced (ones not directly from The Hobbit novel) they feel completely unnecessary and uninteresting—especially Radagast the Brown (Sylvester McCoy) who comes off as a psychotic old man with Ent semen in his hair and a Snow White obsession with forest critters.

Despite Jackson’s attempts to give the film a “stand alone” feeling at the end with an accelerated storyline about Thorin’s (Richard Armitage) acceptance of Bilbo as a part of their gang, Unexpected Journey just feels like the first few episodes of a Hobbit miniseries. Miniseries is an accurate term for this synthesis of a novel and appendices. Its scope is broad enough and its execution feels episodic enough that this 3-hour film feels more like a marathon of TV episodes.

Not to say that this film isn’t enjoyable. Jackson easily captures the whimsy and humor that is prevalent in The Hobbit, although sometimes it feels almost farcical. But the excessive amount of added storylines makes this a tiresome film to sit through. Fellowship felt like a full, entertaining story that left you wanting more when it ends; but Unexpected Journey’s ending leaves you excited to get out of the theater. This film is all exposition and story building without any true payoff. Once you are able to consecutively watch all the films in close conjunction, however, it will be a more enjoyable experience to watch this movie.

Related articles

 

2 Comments
by xoxojk on January 11, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in Movie Review
Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Posted by xoxojk on January 11, 2013

http://thejkreview.wordpress.com/2013/01/11/this-hobbits-unexpected-journey-feels-like-a-rerun/

« Older Posts
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,096 other followers